If shoe companies eliminate the heel lift in distance spikes/flats, will distance records drop?

that's funny because my street shoes have way less of a heel lift than my running trainers.

bump

maybe i'm not completely understanding your question, but why dont you just run in sprint spikes?

a legitimate question wrote:

Shoe companies put in the heel lift 30-40 years ago to limit the stress and strain on the Achilles

No, they did it to create more injuries, to make more money for greedy podiatrists and surgeons. This is why there are hard plastic heel cups, and tight heel flanges that push directly into the achilles.

This is not going to change any time soon.

Actually, Bill Bowerman did it because he observed that runners could extend their stride slightly more if they could land on their heels. He didn't realize how much shock is observed by landing on the midfoot instead of the heel however.

Actually, Bill Bowerman did it because he observed that runners could extend their stride slightly more if they could land on their heels. He didn't realize how much shock is observed by landing on the midfoot instead of the heel however.

drummer wrote:

maybe i'm not completely understanding your question, but why dont you just run in sprint spikes?

I'm thinking about road races run in flats.

If they are unconstrained in how little they are allowed to have (which is the case), then we would presume that they put in the optimal amount (unless they are constrained on the high side) Training shoes will tend to have more lift than racing shoes because lift takes weight and is an issue when racing but not training.

Note that track shoes have constraints on the amount of heel lift, notably in the HJ, but in other events as well.

Look at the foot plant of a sprinter/long sprinter vs. a middle distance vs. a distance runner. Three different foot plants. You don't see many people running an entire 10km up high on their toes as you do in the 100-400. In all cases the heel does strike the ground. I'm sure the R&D people have looked at this stuff and used force plates to examine the difference between the styles.

There's a reason Wanjiru, Hall, and Radcliffe wear the flats they do. If a different design would make them faster, they'd be wearing it.

And I don't buy into the "shoe conspiracy" kool aid. Really? You think podiatrists are greedy bastards trying to make you injured? Well, I've got custom orthotics that make the difference between me getting injured at 60mpw and being able to do 100 no problem.

If you were thinking about flats why did you say spikes/flats?

Are you trying to trick us by thinking one thing while writing another?

Lets suppose that Geb's 2:03:59 was run with a flat whose midsole drop (heel to toe) was 16mm to 10mm. Are you saying that if his shoe had no drop, say an even 10mm heel to toe, then maybe he would have gotten the 2:02:xx that he thinks may be possible.

Someone better e-mail him before his next record attemp.

Ray wrote:

Look at the foot plant of a sprinter/long sprinter vs. a middle distance vs. a distance runner. Three different foot plants. You don't see many people running an entire 10km up high on their toes as you do in the 100-400. In all cases the heel does strike the ground. I'm sure the R&D people have looked at this stuff and used force plates to examine the difference between the styles.

I'm wondering, though, if this has more to do with the shoes (the heel lift in mid/long distance shoes) and not because of pace? I say this because when I run barefoot (slow or fast, and more recently testing out the Vibrams), I don't land on my heels like I do in shoes with any appreciable amount of heel lift. I have even gone to the extent of video taping both conditions and breaking down the clips (landing midfoot while barefoot vs. a dorsiflexed foot in trainers). So I believe you do significantly change your biomechanics based on the mechanics/weight/material distribution of the shoe (shifting back onto your heels when there's greater material under the heel).

I wonder if the heel lift is seen more as "tradition" amongst R&D people. I'm just suggesting they look outside-the-box, that maybe it's not necessary and could be hindering maximal performance. I would imagine the athletes are just going along with and trusting the companies. If I was in their shoes, I would want to get the most out of my body, starting with the feet.

X-Runner wrote:

If you were thinking about flats why did you say spikes/flats?

Are you trying to trick us by thinking one thing while writing another?

Because distance spikes should be included too since they have a heel lift. The person above suggested running distance events in sprint spikes. How about keep the distance plate (w/ fewer spikes) but cut out the heel lift and have an even amount (or no amount) of midsole? Who knows what the impact would be for the track events, but for the longer road events run in flats, it could make a huge difference. So changing both types of shoes would be intriguing.

watch any 800m, 1500m or 3k race and look at the footstrike. The foot strike is so quick and explosive, there is no time for the heel to strike. You have never heard "show em a clean pair of heels" before? In reference to kicking past someone in a middle distance race? Most elites, hell, even most good college & HS runners don't come down on their heels enough to justify eliminating the slight heel pad.

BTW, the heel toe drop on a pair of spikes is in the 6mm to 3mm range. Throw in the height of a spike plate (which does not compress) and it is literally a wash. Then depending on the durometer of the EVA in the heel, you can end up with a taller forefoot than heel. I will give you $1,000 if you can convince me differently. I work for a shoe company and I see the studies everyday. I won't get started on trainers because there honestly isn't enough time, or (my own) energy to pick apart the silliness with heel based crash pads "leading to more injuries than they prevent". But track spikes are worn in competition and the runners come down on the lateral side of the forefoot in most instances. This is also why you don't see posted track spikes. I don't think that an engineering degree is necessary to pick this apart. Like i said in the opening of this post, just go watch a track meet and you'll see what I'm talking about.

In the bad old days there was not much to run in. My first marathon (1974) was run in flats with virtually no lift in the back - their only redeeming feature might have been their weight compared to my trainers.

Top guys have shoes custom made for them. They do not all say - 'first rule is shoes look just like this'.

This thread seems to fueled by a lack of critical reasoning about observed practice and what people do and what they do not do and with $500,000 type of dollars on the line. Geb had to learn to run on his heels/midfoot when he transitioned to the marathon because is track style caused him problems in the latter stages of the race (go look at his first couple of races).

[quote]funny wrote:

watch any 800m, 1500m or 3k race and look at the footstrike. The foot strike is so quick and explosive, there is no time for the heel to strike. You have never heard "show em a clean pair of heels" before? In reference to kicking past someone in a middle distance race? Most elites, hell, even most good college & HS runners don't come down on their heels enough to justify eliminating the slight heel pad.

quote]

So why do shoe companies continue to put a heel lift in distance spikes? What purpose does it serve? Are you saying they do it to balance out the lift of the spike plate?

a legitimate question wrote:

So why do shoe companies continue to put a heel lift in distance spikes? What purpose does it serve? Are you saying they do it to balance out the lift of the spike plate?

income for surgeons and podiatrists

Again, force plates and photo evaluaton show the heel strikes the ground whether you are sprinting or not. contact time in the distance events is greater than the sprints for two simple reasons 1)speed and 2)functional strength or force of contraction over time

Consequently, the distance runners covering 10km and at times even 5km, tend to run "more heel to toe" or in actuality back towards the heel, more than a sprinter does